1. The success of conservation initiatives often depends on the inclusion of diverse stakeholder interests in the decision-making process. Yet, there is a paucity of empirical knowledge concerning the factors that explain why stakeholders do—or do not—believe
that they are meaningfully represented by government agencies.
2. Our study provides insight into the relationship between trust and stakeholder perceptions of inclusivity in public land management decisions. Here, we focus on the U.S. state of Alaska, where almost two-thirds of the land area are managed by the federal government.
3. We used structural equation modelling to test whether an individual's trust and the information sources used to learn about land management positively influenced perceived inclusivity. We conceptualized trust in terms of four dimensions that reflected an individual's disposition to trust, trust in the federal government, trust in shared values and trust that agencies adhere to a moral code.
4. We found that survey respondents across the U.S. state of Alaska had a limited disposition to trust others, did not trust federal land management agencies, did not believe agencies shared their values pertaining to protected area management and did not believe that agencies adhered to a moral code.
5. Beliefs about the morality of agencies were the primary driver of perceived inclusivity in land management decisions, indicating that agencies should focus on solving problems through deliberation and discussion about moral principles rather than by force.
6. Information acquired from professional, community-based or environmental
advocacy exchanges also positively influenced perceived levels of involvement among stakeholders in resource management decisions.
7. These results provide a roadmap for how land management agencies can improve public relations and work towards a model of inclusive conservation around protected areas.
more »
« less
Drivers of social acceptance of natural-resource management: A comparison of the public and professionals in California
The social impacts of natural resource management are challenging to evaluate because their perceived benefits and costs vary across stakeholder groups. Nevertheless, ensuring social acceptance is essential to building public support for adaptive measures required for the sustainable management of ecosystems in a warming climate. Based on surveys with both members of the public and natural-resource professionals in California, we applied structural-equation modeling to examine how psychological factors impact individuals' attitudes toward management's capacity to reduce the impacts of disturbance events, including wildfires, smoke from wildfires, drought, water shortages, tree mortality, and utility failure. We found the members of the public more optimistic than natural-resource professionals, perceiving management capacity to be on average 3.04 points higher (of 10) and displaying higher levels of trust of the government on both the state (Δ = 11%) and federal levels (Δ = 19%). Personal experience with natural-resource events had a positive effect on perceived management in both the public (1.26) and the professional samples (5.05), whereas perceived future risk had a negative effect within both samples (professional = −0.91, public = −0.45). In addition, higher trust and perceived management effectiveness were also linked with higher perceptions of management capacity in the public sample (1.81 versus 1.24), which could affect the acceptance of management actions. Continued social acceptance in a period of increasing risk may depend on managers sharing personal experiences and risk perception when communicating with the public. The contemporary shift toward multibenefit aims is an important part of that message.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2122174
- PAR ID:
- 10539931
- Publisher / Repository:
- Journal of Environmental Management
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Environmental Management
- Volume:
- 345
- Issue:
- C
- ISSN:
- 0301-4797
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 118605
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Natural resource managementForest managementSocial perceptionsAttitude differencesPublic trustMultiple benefits
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Environmental journalists, as gatekeepers, often become arbiters of risk and benefit information. This study explores how their routine news value judgments may influence reporting on marine aquaculture, a growing domestic industry with complex social and ecological impacts. We interviewed New England newspaper journalists using Q methodology, a qualitative dominant mixed-method approach to study shared subjectivity in small samples. Results revealed four distinct reporting perspectives—“state structuralist,” “neighborhood preservationist,” “industrial futurist,” and “local proceduralist”—stemming from the news value and objectivity routines journalists used in news selection. Findings suggest implications for public understanding of, and positionality toward, natural resource use and development.more » « less
-
Mukherjee, Amitava (Ed.)more » « less
What influences the adoption of SARS-CoV-2 mitigation behaviors–both personal, such as mask wearing and frequent handwashing, and social, such as avoiding large gatherings and physical contact–across countries? Understanding why some individuals are more willing to change their behavior to mitigate the spread of a pandemic will not only help us to address the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic but also to respond to future ones. Researchers have pointed to a variety of factors that may influence individual adoption of personal and social mitigation behaviors, including social inequality, risk perception, personality traits, and government policies. While not denying the importance of these factors, we argue that the role of trust and confidence has received insufficient attention to date. Our study explores whether there is a difference in the way trust and confidence in particular leaders and organizations affect individual compliance and whether this effect is consistent across different types of mitigation behaviors. Specifically, we utilize an original cross-national survey conducted during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (May-June 2020) to investigate how trust in scientists, medical professionals, politicians, and religious leaders and confidence in global, national, and local health organizations affects individual compliance in 16 countries/territories across five world regions. Our analyses, which control for the aforementioned factors as well as several others, suggest that trust in politicians and confidence in national health ministries have the most consistent influence on whether individuals adopt both personal and social mitigation behaviors. Across our sample, we find that greater trust in politicians is associated with lower levels of individual compliance with public health directives, whereas greater confidence in the national health ministry is associated with higher levels of individual compliance. Our findings suggest the need to understand trust and confidence as among the most important individual level characteristics driving compliance when developing and delivering messaging about the adoption of mitigation behaviors. The content of the message, it seems, will be most effective when citizens across countries trust its source. Trusted sources, such as politicians and the national health ministry, should thus consider working closely together when determining and communicating recommended health behaviors to avoid contradicting one another.
-
This study examines farmers' acceptance of green ammonia produced by upcycling waste nitrogen using renewable energy. A mail survey, targeting a random sample of crop growers in Iowa, USA, found moderately high acceptance: about 50% support green ammonia as a fertilizer and 32% support green ammonia as a fuel. Support for green hydrogen is only 17% (24% opposing), demonstrating a preference of 2nd-generation over 1st-generation technologies. Ordinal logistic regression reveals social and psychological factors affecting attitude, including income, ideology, perceived benefit, ammonia usage, trust in science and technology, personal belief in reducing waste nitrogen, and social norm.more » « less
-
As wildfires grow in frequency and severity in the U.S., especially in the western regions, understanding which information sources are trusted by households and the level of trust in natural resource agencies for wildfire management is crucial. The Theory of Motivated Reasoning suggests that trust in information sources and agencies aligns with individuals' value and ideological orientations. This study uses Cultural Theory to examine how cultural traits influence trust and use of wildfire information and management agencies. Surveys of Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) households in Deschutes County, Oregon, reveal that egalitarians are more likely to trust and use information from natural resource agencies, while individualists rely on family and neighbors. Egalitarians also trust resource managers to implement prescribed fire and forest thinning, whereas individualists are less trusting of government agencies in these efforts. The study offers recommendations for policymakers and managers to better communicate wildfire information to diverse audiences based on cultural traits and trust levels.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118605
